1. This petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 09-06-2008 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Seoni, whereby Criminal Revision No. 7 of 2008 preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed and the order of confiscation passed by Authorised Officer-cum-Sub Divisional officer, Seoni, in Forest Offence No. 2802/04 dated 21-03- 2006 confiscating the tractor and trolly bearing Chasis No. 711188 M-3 EF 187 and affirmed in Appeal decided by Conservator of Forests/Appellate Authority, Seoni Circle, Seoni, has been upheld. Relevant facts briefly are that, on the intervening night 20-03- 2006 and 21- 03-2006 forest officers during course of patrolling at village Khursipar, South Seoni Forest Division (Territorial) apprehended tractor trolly bearing Registration No. MP-22-B/4588 carrying fresh 8 logs of Beeja wood measuring 0.811 cubic feet. Since the forest produce was being transported without any valid or authorised document, the s...

1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has sought following reliefs: (I) To quash the orders in Annexures P-9, P-7 and P-5.(II) To restrain the respondents from taking the possession of the disputed properties from the petitioner and from giving it to the respondent No.3.(III) Issue any other writ/writs, order/orders and direction/ directions as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case.(IV) Award the cost of this petition."2. The petitioner Shri Ram Mandir Trust (hereinafter referred to as "the Trust") is a registered Public Trust registered under the M.P. Public Trusts Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1951") . Before registering the Trust an application was submitted by the petitioner on 31.8.1953 for its registration (Annexure P-1) and the properties which are mentioned in the application include one "Hanuman Mandir". The said Trust was registered under the Act of 1951 vide orde...

(1) This order shall govern in all the above referred link cases.(2) Petitioners have prayed to quash the entire proceedings in Criminal Case No. 2021/2003 pending before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Burhanpur, arising out of Crime No. 120/2000 registered by PS-City Kotwali, District-Burhanpur.(3). It is an admitted fact that Subrato Roy ( petitioner in M.Cr.C.No. 9421/2007) was posted as Incharge-Chief Engineer at Bhopal, Ram Kumar Maitra (petitioner in M.Cr.C.No.9424/2007) was also posted as Chief Engineer, Bhopal. V.K.Vaishnav (petitioner in M.Cr.C.No. 11602/07) was Executive Engineer at Regional Office, Indore, Harish Bagwaiya (petitioner in M.Cr.C.7672/08) was Assistant Engineer at Regional Office, Indore, and N.K. Jain (petitioner in M.Cr.C.No.11603/07) was Secretary of the Mandi Samiti, Burhanpur at the time of alleged incident.(4) The instant matters arise out of Resolution dated 1.10.96 passed by Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Burhanpur. The Mandi Samiti resolved to construct...

1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 05-05-2008 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur; whereby, Original Application No. 242/2002 filed by the petitioner seeking appointment on compassionate grounds has been rejected.2. The facts briefly are that father of the petitioner, Gopal Prasad, employed with Central Ordnance Depot, Jabalpur, died in harness on 27-05-1995. The petitioner being dependent filed an application on 22-06-1995 seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. His request for appointment was rejected by order dated 25-04-2001. Aggrieved whereof the petitioner filed Original Application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur, raising contentions therein that, between the period from 1995 to 2001 seven Boards were constituted for considering requests for appointment on compassionate grounds. It was contended that only the favoured one were granted appoin...

1. The appeal has been preferred by the appellant under section 454 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by judgment dated 25.6.2008 passed by the Special Judge (NDPS) Act, Bhopal in Special Case No. 38/2001.2. The prosecution's case in short is that on 19.7.2001 at about 22:40 PM, Chandra Shekhar (PW-1), Sub Inspector of Police received a secret information that tenant of House No. 204, Siddharth Complex, Bhopal is in possession of psychotropic substance and is likely to abscond. On the basis of the aforesaid information, Sub Inspector apprised his superior officer Sanjay Singh, CSP, completed other formalities and conducted search of aforesaid House No. 204, Siddharth Complex where appellant Ravi Kumar @ Anna @ Ravindram @ Udayan, @ Uday Kumar was living as tenant. During the search, a black bag containing 250 gm contraband article (Ganja) was seized and a briefcase containing a mobile phone and currency notes of Rs. 18,30,630/- was also seized. It has been further alleged that on the basis of...

1. Learned Special Judge (Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985) {for short 'NDPS Act'}, Khandwa has passed the impugned judgment dated 8/9/2009 in Special Case No. 6/2009 whereby appellant has been convicted under Section 8 read with Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Act and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 8 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-, with default stipulations. 2. Being aggrieved appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.3. Prosecution story in short is that on 15.6.2009 at about 11.40, Mr. M.K. Raghuwanshi (PW8), Station House Officer, Police Outpost, Boregaon, received a secrete information that appellant Bhuru S/o Najir Pinjara will go to Khandwa having contraband articles 'ganja' with him. Mr. M.K. Raghuwanshi (PW8) apprised his superior officers at Khandwa about aforesaid secrete information. He called the Panch witnesses and proceeded to the place which was informed in a secrete information an...

1. Shri Praven Chourasia, Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Mahendra Pateria, Counsel for the respondent No.1. This order shall decide W.P. No.4048/2011 [Mahesh Singh vs. Barkatullah University & others] and W.P. No. 4050/2011 [Munesh Kumar vs. Barkatullah University & others] in which facts and relief prayed are similar. It is submitted by the petitioner that the respondent No.2 submitted a list of the students admitted for B.P.Ed. Course and deposited all the fees with the respondent No.1 but the respondent No.1 is not conducting special examination for B.P.Ed. without any reason. It is submitted that respondent/University be directed to conduct special examination for the petitioners for B.P.Ed. Course, as directed by this Court in W.P. 18067/10.2. As the controversy is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in W.P.18067/10 (Dalchand & others vs. Barkatullah University), for ready reference relevant part of the order is quoted hereunder, we propose to dispose of this matter f...

1- Petitioner, who has retired from the post of Deputy Chief Executive Officer, has filed this writ petition challenging the order-dated 8.1.2010 (Annexure P/10) by which refixation of pay has been ordered and certain benefits of pay fixation earlier granted on promotion to the post of Dy. Chief Executive Officer, are withdrawn and recovery ordered.2- Facts indicate that petitioner was initially appointed as LDC on 1.9.1968 in Municipal Council, Pipariya, where he worked upto 1982. In the meanwhile, in the year 1976 when Special Area Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'SADA'), Pachmarhi was constituted, the limit of this authority was extended to the area coming under Municipal Council Pipariya. Accordingly on the basis of the application submitted, petitioner's services were absorbed in SADA, Pachmarhi and petitioner was transferred to SADA, Pachmarhi in the capacity of Head Clerk. This fact is not in dispute. Vide order-dated 24.12.1982 Annexure P/1, two posts of Deput...

1. Appellant has preferred this appeal challenging his conviction and order of sentence passed by First Addl. Sessions Judge, Balaghat in S.T. No.96/93, decided on 04.01.96.2. Appellant has been convicted under Section 450, 376 of IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years for each of the offences, by the impugned judgment. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently3. According to prosecution, on 16.1.93 about 12 'O'clock in the noon at village Parsatola, when prosecutrix was all alone in the house, her parents and other family members having gone to work in the field, appellant Nanhu, who lived in the neighbouring house, came to the house of the prosecutrix and caught hold of her. Appellant proposed her for sex, but she declined, then he forcibly dragged her inside the house, prosecutrix pushed him, but he overpowered her and bit her on her cheeks, fell her on the ground, undressed her and committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. On her screaming, the ...

(1) This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner which is a public undertaking to invoke the extra ordinary powers of this Court for removal of public nuisance done by respondent no.1 by creating a wall by which the flow of the water by Nala has been obstructed and thereby the water is accumulated in the residential houses constructed by petitioner Housing Board for public at Burhanpur.(2) It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that learned SDM, Burhanpur has wrongly dismissed the petition under Section 133 Cr.P.C.as well as the learned ASJ, Burhanpur, though evidence was produced by the petitioner and no evidence was produced by respondent no.1 and even no cross-examination was done by respondent no.1 by remaining absent before learned SDM Court.(3) I have heard the counsel for the parties , and perused the record.(4) Submission of learned counsel for petitioner is that land bearing Khasra No. 207 and 208 have been acquired by the Housing Board and ...